NOTES TO CHAPTER VIII

Note A. The vicar of Brayton is not a very reliable witness. There is no proof that the earlier part of his evidence is false, but he was one of the most zealous leaders of the Pilgrimage and in his confession, of course, tried to insinuate that he was really devoted to the King, laying all his misdemeanour at Darcy’s door. In his account of the week from 15 October to 22 October he never mentioned his second visit to Aske at York, when he told the captain that Pontefract Castle could not hold out.

Note B. As Darcy was the keeper of Pontefract Castle, the blame for its defenceless condition may be laid on his own shoulders. But it must be remembered that he had been detained in London for several years, and had returned home only a few months before the rebellion. All the royal castles in the north were out of repair at this time; the walls of Berwick were falling, Carlisle was scarcely defensible, Barnard Castle was not in good governance^[884]. When fortresses so near the Border were neglected, it was not likely that any money would be spent over Pontefract, which lay beyond the area of Scots’ raids. After the Pilgrimage of Grace, Henry devoted a good deal of attention to the repair of the northern defences, on which some of the monastic spoils were spent^[885].

Note C. Sir Henry Saville reported these words to Cromwell, but it does not appear whether he heard them himself. He was on bad terms with Darcy, who was Sir Richard Tempest’s friend.

191Note D. A note is appended to these articles in “The Letters and Papers of Henry VIII,” Vol. XI, stating that they are some of the articles printed by Speed in his “History of Great Britain.” This is a mistake, as the articles printed by Speed are those which the Pilgrims’ Council drew up at Pontefract at the beginning of December. They are printed in the same volume of “The Letters and Papers,” No. 1246. Speed says nothing about the York articles, which are the germ from which the others grew, but have no further connection with them^[886].

Note E. It is impossible to estimate the strength of the Pilgrims’ host with any accuracy, though it seems certain that rumour exaggerated their numbers very much. For instance, it was said that the rebels at York numbered 40,000; Wilfred Holme puts their number at 25,000 and Darcy at 20,000.

Note F. Two accounts of the first meeting between Aske and Darcy are preserved, Aske’s and Archbishop Lee’s. Aske’s account has been followed in preference to Lee’s when they differ for the following reasons:

(1) Archbishop Lee wrote his account when he knew himself to be in danger and desired above everything to vindicate his loyalty; naturally his testimony is more an explanation and excuse for his own conduct than a simple statement of fact.

(2) Aske prepared his narrative for the King when he believed himself to be pardoned and taken into favour. As he wrote it in London, far away from his authorities, he was obliged to omit many details, but this does not lay him open to the charge that he failed to state the whole truth.

(3) Aske’s answers when he was examined in the Tower are fuller and bear out his earlier statement. He knew that he was in fact a condemned criminal, and to lie was alike useless, dishonourable, and certain to be discovered.

(4) When his accounts are checked by a score of miscellaneous depositions drawn up by all sorts of men, he is seldom, if ever, found to have misstated a fact. The other evidence either corresponds to his, or dovetails with his statements. There is only one exception to this, which will be discussed later^[887].

(5) Archbishop Lee has clearly perverted the truth in one or two cases in order to put a more loyal complexion on his actions. This is not a very serious charge to bring against a weak old gentleman in peril of his life. It is difficult to believe that Lee made the frequent loyal speeches and defiances which he puts into his own mouth, to the confusion of the rebel leaders, for the Pilgrims, on his own showing, continued to think that he sympathised with them.

(6) With one notable exception, hereafter to be mentioned, Lee did absolutely nothing either for King or commons. In contrast to this indecision, Aske was entirely devoted to his cause. The captain never admitted himself to be in the wrong; to the end he justified the Pilgrimage as a desperate remedy for a desperate disease. Obviously the man who is not ashamed of the truth is less likely to lie than the man who deplores it.

192